EVERYTHING that I've been trying to say about the bible and Homosexuality in a nut shell?

Question

The Greek text of the NT does NOT use the specific word homosexual. If you have a Bible that uses the specific word "homosexual," then you need to throw it out and get a new Bible, the translators have taken gross liberties.

The word being translated to "homosexual" in 1 Corithians 6, and 1 Timothy 1 is "arsenokoitai." This word does not appear in Greek writings prior to Paul's use of it in the NT. Paul made the word up!!

Nobody knows for sure what meaning Paul was trying to convey by it's use. If the meaning Paul wanted to convey was homosexual, then he would have used the word "paiderasste", which was the term used at the time for male homosexual. The word "paiderasste" does not appear in the Bible.

"Arsenokoitai" is made up of two parts: "arsen" means "man"; "koitai" means "beds." Literally translated "arsenokoitai" is a "male-bedder." It is interesting to note that during the time of Martin Luther, the word was universally translated as masturbators untill the 20th century.

Male-bedder has also been interpreted to mean a male prostitute. Which seems to me would be much closer to it's meaning than homosexual.

The Greek word being translated as effeminate is "malakoi." The word appears two other times in the NT, both times being translated as "soft." Taken in the context of this passage some believe it to actually mean "soft in morals." Within it's context, that meaning makes more sense than it does as a descriptive of a person's outward mannerisms.

Jesus, himself, never says one word against homosexuality. If it is the grave sin it is made out to be, then you would think that Jesus would have mentioned it.

In fact, Jesus may have confirmed that homosexuals are from birth in Matthew 19:11. The modern meaning of the word eunuch is a castrated male. However, in ancient times it was a broad term that included any man who lacked sexual desire for women for whatever reason. Hence, their use as chamberlains or officers in the Bible.

It should be noted that men who are castrated after puberty do not lose their sex drive, and historically have made untrustworthy chamberlains. In fact, many women of the harem preferred having sex with castrated males because they could not get pregnant by them.

Jesus even states that not everyone can accept this word. If eunuch simply meant a castrated male or a person born with deformed genitals, then why would some not be able to accept this word? If the ancient term "eunuch" did indeed include homosexuals (some surviving ancient Roman literature points to this), then Jesus was proven right, some cannot accept that homosexuality is normal and natural from birth.

BTW: Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed because of homosexuality.

The decision to destroy the city of Sodom was made prior to the incident with the angels.

Ezekeiel 16:49-50 tells us exactly why the city of Sodom was destroyed: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." There is no mention of homosexuality.

In Matthew 10:14-15 & Luke 10:7-16, Jesus implies that the sin of the people of Sodom was inhospitality to strangers.

Jude 1:7 talks about the sin of Sodom as "going after strange flesh." That would seem to me to be talking about bestiality, the angels were not human. Would angels even be confined to definitions of male or female sexual characteristics?

The other problem with saying that this story is about homosexuality is that Lot offers his two daughters to the mob. Lot lived in Sodom and would have certainly known if the men in the mob were homosexual. Why would he even offer his two daughters to a mob of homosexuals? If the mob's intentions were homosexual in nature, then why didn't Lot offer the mob his two future son-in-laws?

Romans 1:26-27 is not speaking about people with a homosexual orientation. It is speaking specifically about heterosexual men and women who go against their own sexual orientation.

The key word here is "exchanges." That implies that the men and women being talked about had known something different previously. They had previously known the truth about God, then exchanged him for what they knew to be a lie, (what went against their own nature.) They had previously been heterosexual, and again exchanged it for what goes against their own nature.

The same would ring true if their sexual orientation had been homosexual and then they exchanged it for heterosexuality, which would go against their own nature.

MY Blog for my journey of getting the TRUE translation of the bible:

http://thetrueenglishtranslationofthebible.blogspot.com/

Answer 1

These two links also show how the bible has been rewrriten plus show wrong the homophobes are about Gays bieng a sin and stuff

Answer 2

Paul is not the first person to put two words together to make a compound word.
αρσεν + κοιτη = αρσενοκοιταις (Dative Plural case) The word in 1 Timothy 1:10 is αρσενοκοιταις not αρσενοκοιται.1 Your translation is that of Plural Nominative, κοιτοι is the Greek word for beds. κοιτη has more of a connotation of lasciviousness (sexual desire or lust)2 Therefore a man who lusts for another man in bed, shortened to a man who lusts for another man. *shrug* Why is it that you are the only one that comes up with this and not the rest of the scholastic community?

I would put the Lexicon down, pick up a good Greek grammar and start learning Koine or better yet Classical Greek.

Answer 3

You are absolutely right and you've saved me a whole ton of research! I've always wanted to ask this question but wanted to make sure I had the words and their translations correct. I never even knew that it is only in this century it's come to be interpreted as "homosexual". Wow. People hate anything that doesn't suit them as beneficial. What a load of garbage.

And you're dead on with 'paiderasste'; if aresenokoitai meant homosexual then it would never have existed. There was a word for that already. Also kind of proves that Paul was a complete nutjob.

Answer 4

Thank you, alpha kenny. I'm a christian, and I consider myself to be open minded. I do not condemn homosexuals or anyone else, for that matter. I think that the Bible is open for interpretatino....it speaks to each person individually, to meet their needs. Different people get different things out of it. I think a lot of it is allegorical, etc.

What makes me sad is that fundamentalists make the rest of us Christians look like idiots, like mean, cruel people. Most of us are not like that. (I am not, anyway.) Most of us live and let live. We don't go around passing out tracts and trying to convert everyone we see. That's wrong, IMO.

Thank you again for this insightful post. I hope you have a great day!

Answer 5

Yes, then the real estranged person from God is the man who uses men in the absence of women. A part time job I once had was relieved by a man who loved other men and so everyone assumed I was he. The stories I got from men who were seeking his services were amazing and I told one and all that I had no solution for them. Its something you have to laugh about afterward but before I saw my supervisor I did wonder why I was being approached because nobody came out and said lets have sex like you would with a woman. My point is, those men didn't think they were homosexuals while in fact, that is exactly what they were.

Answer 6

True that in the Scriptures there is no talk of homosexuality directly. There is a reason. There is a difference between one who is homosexual and one who lives according to their homosexual tendency. I guess to make the difference clear is that homosexual is indicative of the orientation and gay is indicative of living according to that orientation.
St. Paul knew that living out one's desire, according to the flesh, or according to one's sexual orientation can lead to immorality. Pastorally St. Paul understands the struggles a homosexual has in their attraction to the same sex. Therefore, he does not use such a word as paiderasste because such a word is about the person and not the sin he is teaching about. But to express the immorality or sin he used Arsenokoitai. The word is expressing the immoral action, the sin, and not the person. His pastoral advice to them is to resist because it leads to immorality just as he advises heterosexual men not to follow their orientation liberally for it to leads to immorality as well. He encourages both homosexuals and heterosexuals to live chaste lives.
Just because St. Paul "made up" the word arsenokoitai does not mean the meaning or word itself is false and must be discarded or disbelieved. If people did not make up words to express a concept, then how does our vocabulary increase? I guess what I am trying to say is from a favorite quote of mine, which goes like this, "How shall our thoughts be elevated if our words never are?"
I'm sorry that I cannot answer the rest of your statements (it is too lengthy). But I hope that what I have written is helpful to you in understanding St. Paul's letters. May the Lord bless and keep you. May the light of His face shine upon you.

God's and your beast of burden
Fr. john

Answer 7

I have to say that I have looked up all the scripture that you have referenced, and I have to agree with you. I thank you, very much, for bringing this to people's attentions. I feel that it was very informative and very well written. I can only hope that people have taken note of this, for future reference. I certainly have. Thank you.

Answer 8

I am sorry but why are you trying to make christians look bad. There are alot of christians out there that are tolerant of homosexuals. I know I am. So please relax and think before you ask these questions. Commiting homosexual acts is a sin and sadly your gonna have to accept that.

Answer 9

Thanks man!!!

As a newly converted christian i was having a lot of trouble dealing with this homofobic thing, since some of my friends are homossexuals and particularly i see nothing wrong with it. I was very happy to read what you have written, im going to print it, still, could i please ask you a favor?
Could you name your sources or books in which i can find more information about it?? please??

thanks

Paz de Cristo

Answer 10

Well, Catholics do not condemn homosexuals, they are against the practice of homosexuality.

That not the same thing, but people think that is the same thing.

Catholics run many of the medical facilities even some free places who help and take care of gay people with AIDS, they do that if they are really against the gays?

Imagine you really are against suicide and you see someone trying to suicide. So do not even try to say even that is bad?. No, you try to say something it that case.

The same thing for the catholics, they say and believe homosexuality are bad because that harms you spiritually, psychology and possibly in other ways to, and living without homosexuality is a happier life.

That is not only for the Bible. Catholics use both the Bible and their tradition in religious matters. I do not know how others Christians do that either.

That is, we try to help gay people to be happier, but they can continue their lives practicing homosexuality if they like.

Most catholics priest i know are not homosexual ever, and the few are know are already punished by the canon law of th Church. The trials are do without much publicity, that is maybe why you do not know about it.

I think that we have the rights to believe homosexuality is wrong as gay people are to be gay. We do not kill or harrass gay people, we only say that is wrong for us.